Qualitative SOTL Research Methods Brad Wuetherick GMCTE Krista

Qualitative SOTL Research Methods Brad Wuetherick, GMCTE Krista Trinder, ES&D

Overview Today, we will explore: n Characteristics of Qualitative Research (and the usefulness of the binary Qual. vs. Quant. ) n Different methods/tools used in Qualitative Research n Different research methodologies n Ensuring trustworthiness of qualitative research

Introduction Key Definitions: • Methodologies – how we know the world or gain knowledge of it (expression of ontology and epistemology) • Ontology – our most basic beliefs of the nature of reality (and what it means to be human) • Epistemology – understanding of knowledge, what counts as knowledge, and on what basis we can make knowledge claims • Methods – the practical tools for collecting and analyzing data

Educational Philosophy n Personal educational philosophy impacts the ease with which people access different research paradigms n Which description best describes your approach? (See handout)

Characteristics of Qualitative Research Quantitative-Qualitative distinction – is it a useful binary? n All qualitative data can be interpreted quantitatively; all quantitative research requires qualitative judgment n Both quant. and qual. research can be used in service of any paradigm (tools can often be used interchangeably) n

Characteristics of Qualitative Research n Naturalistic/interpretive n n – Study phenomena in natural settings – Meanings participants bring to phenomena Context-bound, lived experiences No fixed external reality Individuals’ values involved (researcher and participant) Relies on the collection of detailed data

Methods of Qualitative Research n n n Interviews Focus Groups Observations Textual Analysis …

Interviews Types of Interviews – structured, semistructured, unstructured n Advantages: n – Provides direct access to the social experience of the participants – data are rich both in terms of details and descriptions – flexibility – can be adjusted to each participant and evolved over time – Allows probing of participant answers to verify our understandings and explore unexpected issues

Interviews n Disadvantages: – Data collection (and transcription) is time consuming – Results are not generalizable – Some interactions don’t work well – Potential inconsistencies between interviewers make comparisons hard – Social desirability, conformity, and power relations can ‘bias’ responses

Focus Groups n Advantages: – Similar to interviews – Participants can develop opinions/thoughts by listening to others – Rapidity in gathering various opinions (5 -10 participants normally) n Disadvantages: – – Group dynamic can be detrimental Artificial setting Leader’s attitude may affect dynamic Excessive influence exerted by certain participants

Characteristics of a Good Interviewer/Facilitator n n n n Knowledgeable (familiar with the topic) Structuring (outlines procedure of interview) Clear (asks simple, easy, and short questions) Gentle (tolerant, sensitive and patient) Steering (able to control course of conversation to avoid digressions) Remembers (retains the subject information from interviewee) Interprets (provides interpretation of what is said for clarification)

Observations Types: – complete participant (non-disclosed) – participant observer (disclosed, peer) – non-participant observer (disclosed, nonpeer) n Establishing rapport: – Be unobtrusive – Be honest n

Observations Levels of Observations: – Descriptive; Focused; Selective n Based on Fieldnotes: – Descriptive – who is present; what are their roles; what is happening; when; how long; where; why; how is it organized; etc. – Reflective – reflections on analysis and method; points of clarification; reflections on observer’s frame of mind n

Textual Analysis n n n n Participant writing (Journals, Autobiography) Historical Documents Websites Policy Documents Newspapers Letters …

Methodologies n n n n Phenomenology Grounded Theory Narrative Inquiry Ethnography Case Study Auto-Ethnography Phenomenography … (and the list goes on)

Phenomenology “The study of lived experience” n Purpose – to uncover the meaning (essence) of a phenomenon, as it presents itself to conscious thought, through the lived experience of participants n Requires researcher to suspend (as much as possible) pre-conceived notions of the reality of participants’ experiences and understand what the lived experience means to the participant n Usually relies on multiple interviews/focus groups with key informants (and possibly observations) n

Grounded Theory “The development of theory grounded in the data” n Purpose – to develop a practical theory (explanations of a phenomenon) based (or grounded) in the data n Different in that researchers hope theories might be generalized to other settings n Usually relies on interviews, which are analyzed (through constant comparison) to inform further waves of data collection and analysis, which eventually forms a theory n

Narrative Inquiry “Using narrative to understand lived experience” n Purpose – if we understand the world narratively, as we do, then it makes sense to study the world narratively n Narrative is not embedded in the nature of phenomena, but rather is a heuristic device (a metaphor) useful for understanding phenomena – “Narrative is stories lived and told” n Usually relies on interviews structured around story and reflection on lived experience (could be on reflective journals, autobiographies, etc. ) n

Ethnography “Science of writing about/describing cultural or social groups” n Purpose – to discover the essence of a culture and its unique complexities n Involves description and interpretation of the interaction of others in the context of a cultural/social group n Usually relies on observation, interviews with key informants, and richly detailed descriptions n

Trustworthiness Essentially means validity and reliability for qualitative analysis/data n Sample questions that need to be addressed: – Do data and results reflect reality (ie. participants’ perspective)? – Can the findings be applied to other settings? – Are results consistent with data collected? – Given the data, would others concur with the findings? – Is the researcher a dependable instrument? – Was research conducted in an ethical manner? n

Trustworthiness n Methods for ensuring trustworthiness: – Triangulation – Member checks – Peer review – Researcher’s position – Prolonged and varied field experiences – Maximum variation – Audit trail – Thick descriptions

Choose Your Method See handout – “Considerations for Assessing Qualitative Research” n Work independently n Exchange thoughts and ideas: consult n Leave at your own discretion n Thank you! See you on November 21 (for more fun to do with Quantitative Methods)!